Is John Edward Genuine?

Over the years, I have seen many so-called mediums on the TV. They claim to be able to talk to the dead, and there are millions of people who believe that they have received communications from the other side.

Many are convincing - at first, others are quite obviously total frauds.

There is one, however, who for me suggests that perhaps he does have 'something' - John Edward. Unusually, he appears not to work and develop on his subject's body language, or vocal feedback. He gives the impression that he knows he is correct when he makes statements allegedly from the beyond. Some of his statements are quite outrageous and most unlikely to work in with coincidence. For example, he might say, "This person was shot in the shoulder, and passed over two weeks later." A fraudster might have said, "He tells me that he died unexpectantly. Is that right?"

I would appreciate any feedback you might have on this guy. I know that he has declined to appear on TV for scientific evaluation with Randy (forgotten his second name). He has said that his readings over the years are sufficient validation for what he does.

I'm not familiar this this guy, but all of these mediums are tricks based on suggestibility, hypnosis, and NLP (neuro linguistic programming). Someone just needs to have a good emotional intelligence to implement these techniques well.

Perhaps I should have added that John Edward heads an American TV program called 'Crossing Over.' It is a very successful program that has been running for about ten years now, and is syndicated throughout the world (via Sky for us).

He travels throughout the States, and his voice suggests that he is of Irish descent. He is a very fast talker, and works quite comfortably even when the recipient doesn't say a word. Some of his sessions are done with complete strangers over the telephone, or hidden behind a curtain where he cannot see them.

If I didn't know better, I would have to say that he is either genuine or a mind-reader. The trouble with the latter is that the sitter often has to think back in their memories to find the associations, so it probably isn't that.

These performers have teams of researchers looking in to the background of their 'randomly chosen' sitter. They also had people chatting to the sitters before the show 'just to reassure them'.

Yes, I am quite sure that this happens. Also the very careful monitoring of the audience as they are waiting to go into the studio: 'I hope Aunty Agnes comes through', and 'Wont Uncle Herbert be suprised if Aunty Mavis turns up.'

John Edward is the head of a huge corporation. They can afford to hire detectives, and surveillance equipment.

Perhaps because it is such a slick operation, he is able to persuade guillable people such as myself that there maybe is such a thing as a conduit through to an afterlife. There again, I am one of the doubters - there are millions who believe him totally.

<zombie voice> I did - I think Darren Brown is amazing.... must buy his books ....</zombie voice>

Perhaps in another forum, we should ask if what they are doing is ethically wrong.

Lawsuits will probably take care of it.
Stage hypnotism is now banned in most theatres. Somebody claimed that a hypnotist taking them back to their childhood brought back 'hidden memories' of abuse. Since the abuser was long dead / didn't have any money, they sued the venue instead. Now most theatre's insurance policies don't allow hypnotism.

No, he's simply an evil person who preys on the sorrow of families and individuals. His process is an old stage trick - a fancy form of 20 questions, that has been used by people from performers in Vegas to the Amazing Kreskan.
As noted above, people have detected his agents moving through crowds, prior to shows, gathering information from people whom he later "randomly" selects.
Finally, his "hit" rate, for questions, even for the people he selects, is far at or slightly below the rate for simply guessing.
There is no more touch with supernatural here than there was in the 1800s when seances and crystal balls were the rage - just slick operators taking advantage of others.

If Edwards consoles a grieving mother by convincing her that her son didn't suffer when he died, can it be argued that Edwards provides a valuable service?

Help is available in form of shrinks, therapists, and even hypnotherapists. But if you are gong to provide a service by faking something as talking do the dead, I would make sure to put this in the contract.

Could it be that mysticism is an essential aspect of mental health, for some?

I suspect it is. Once a person accepts some arbitrary mysticism it will eventually get tied to the body chemistry given enough time. The attachment could be in forms of anchors, meaning that something small such as a gesture or a thought in something could trigger an emotional state. An example of such anchoring is a prayer. After saying the prayer, the person might come out in a different emotional state, usually more at peace.

"I'm not asking if lying is okay. I am asking if he provides a valuable service when he provides comfort to people who have suffered a loss."

I would have to answer no - I can't see how providing something that is totally baseless, a lie, in fact, can or should be considered to be comfort. My answer would not change even if money were not charged for the service; charging fees for sessions is adding insult to the fraud.